Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits, but it only states the output and required parameters. It does not explicitly mention read-only behavior, error handling, or any side effects, leaving the agent to infer safety from the verb 'Returns'.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is extremely concise at two sentences. The first sentence states the core purpose, and the second reinforces a key constraint. Every word earns its place with no redundancy.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a simple query tool with well-documented parameters in the schema and a clear output statement in the description, the description is mostly complete. It lacks context about when to use it vs siblings, but that is covered under usage guidelines. The output schema is absent, but the description explicitly states what the tool returns.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is high (80%) and includes detailed descriptions for age, term, coverage, and health_class, with enums for gender and health_class. The description adds nothing beyond the schema, except reiterating that all parameters are required, which is already in the required list.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the tool returns monthly and annual premiums for a specific profile. The verb 'Returns' is specific, and the resource 'premium' is distinct from sibling tools like compare_health_classes or list_options, making its purpose immediately clear.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus the sibling comparison tools. It only notes that all parameters are required, which is already in the schema, but does not indicate scenarios where this tool is preferred or alternatives should be used.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.